And to some extend, I really don't give a fuck about my local/state/national hockey/baseball/football/soccer/curling/jerking team. I do enjoy a good game, but I don't take side... the winner takes it all.
I don't really think that any generalization such as "asian > *" or "western > *" make much sense. You can't summarize 4.3 billions people into one entity called "asian" and even less put a moral/cultural/economical judgement on top of that description.
The US (ie. the US government, and to some extend every western country) needs an enemy. They can't just live their lives. They need a red herring to drive the masses to buy their shit (including policies). The population has been conditioned to woe hatred against a mythical being. It used to be the Russian, it was a great lengthy success. Terrorists don't provide such a good target, the notion is too diffuse, but it's a great tool to fill the gap. Now, the Chinese are perfect.
How refreshing would it be if Sheriff Nocco appropriately laughed at the teacher, said they had both done worse as kids, and lightly chastized the guy for wasting his time because he had real crimes to work on.
That's probably how 99.99% of sheriff/LEO reacts, and then, there is this 0.01% who seem to think they are white knights in shinny armor fighting a crusade which makes the other 99.99% looks like waffen-SS... I wonder if MSM have an agenda...
The government is specifically and explicitly set up to represent and defend the interests the most influancial of its citizens.
FTFY.
It's not the majority, it is the majority of voters, which themselves are a subset of the whole citizen group. Just the convicted felons represent about 9% of the total US population, and they are denied any right to vote.
How about being able to carry weapons to protect myself from Mikey the Loan Shark ? Currently there is two entities who can use force. The Government, because it decides of the rules, and criminals, because they don't give a fuck about the rule. The latter have been helped by the former to prey on "law-abiding" citizen. To some extend, even the former also prey on "law-abiding" citizen.
Quite the opposite, repeal local telco monopolies, let competitor install fiber and equipment on street pole, offer *more* competition and the problem of badly behaving monopolies will stop. This is what happened in France. The historical formerly state-owned operator service was crap, the market was deregulated, a competitor entered the market, slashed prices, offered more services and everything went better. NN offer nothing but more regulation over and already heavily regulated market.
On one side, if you are careful enough, the government already has no reach in such a contract. So your example is pointless. Government are not an all-knowing entity.
On the other side, it could also be argue that if you support death penalty, you agree for the entity you call "government" to contract a hitman (which happen to be itself) against an individual you judge harmful to you. If you also extend this reasoning to the law enforcement/justice system, the government itself is an oppressive entity which punish by various violent methods (fines, imprisonment) misbehavior.
I don't agree with your point. What I want is the end of Government's monopoly in the use of force (ie. own, bear, and use arms in defense of lives and property) as well as end of violence-enforced compulsory theft (also known as taxes). To some extend, anybody should be allowed to negotiate the social contract, and opt-out from unwanted clause.
This is not the correct approach. Even if I believe that the *original* purpose of a strongly Constitution-bounded limited Government's policies are driven with good intention, it always backfires into less honorable behaviors, and less boundaries, either intentionally or not. When these behaviors became unbearable by too many influential (yet minority) people, it turns into more laws, and inevitably into more dishonorable behaviors. This is the nature of the system.
Wait a bit, let people [ed. especially here] celebrate their "total internet freedom" [ed. nothing gonna really change, it's just a placebo] for a few years, and then implement full Title II regulation.
The only reason I use "frack" instead of "fuck" is that generally, it goes through forum swearing's censorship unaltered. But yeah, I still do love BSG.
You, Dice's editors, all love SF, and spam/. with all the legends, but ENOUGH is fracking ENOUGH. Maturity is about knowing when to stop, and I think we've way beyond reason...
Slashdot Mirror
OP said "github", not "git" altogether...
And to some extend, I really don't give a fuck about my local/state/national hockey/baseball/football/soccer/curling/jerking team. I do enjoy a good game, but I don't take side... the winner takes it all.
I don't really think that any generalization such as "asian > *" or "western > *" make much sense. You can't summarize 4.3 billions people into one entity called "asian" and even less put a moral/cultural/economical judgement on top of that description.
I was more thinking Paul Wolfowitz.
The US (ie. the US government, and to some extend every western country) needs an enemy. They can't just live their lives. They need a red herring to drive the masses to buy their shit (including policies). The population has been conditioned to woe hatred against a mythical being. It used to be the Russian, it was a great lengthy success. Terrorists don't provide such a good target, the notion is too diffuse, but it's a great tool to fill the gap. Now, the Chinese are perfect.
How refreshing would it be if Sheriff Nocco appropriately laughed at the teacher, said they had both done worse as kids, and lightly chastized the guy for wasting his time because he had real crimes to work on.
That's probably how 99.99% of sheriff/LEO reacts, and then, there is this 0.01% who seem to think they are white knights in shinny armor fighting a crusade which makes the other 99.99% looks like waffen-SS... I wonder if MSM have an agenda...
I don't specifically hate the government, I just wish to be able to go my own way without interfering, and without interference.
Murder violate the principle of non-initiation of physical force, which is one of the few axioms (if not the only one) of libertarians.
50Mpix on a full-frame is just marketing crap. No lens on the market can approximate this sharpness.
The government is specifically and explicitly set up to represent and defend the interests the most influancial of its citizens.
FTFY.
It's not the majority, it is the majority of voters, which themselves are a subset of the whole citizen group. Just the convicted felons represent about 9% of the total US population, and they are denied any right to vote.
How about being able to carry weapons to protect myself from Mikey the Loan Shark ? Currently there is two entities who can use force. The Government, because it decides of the rules, and criminals, because they don't give a fuck about the rule. The latter have been helped by the former to prey on "law-abiding" citizen. To some extend, even the former also prey on "law-abiding" citizen.
Quite the opposite, repeal local telco monopolies, let competitor install fiber and equipment on street pole, offer *more* competition and the problem of badly behaving monopolies will stop. This is what happened in France. The historical formerly state-owned operator service was crap, the market was deregulated, a competitor entered the market, slashed prices, offered more services and everything went better. NN offer nothing but more regulation over and already heavily regulated market.
On one side, if you are careful enough, the government already has no reach in such a contract. So your example is pointless. Government are not an all-knowing entity.
On the other side, it could also be argue that if you support death penalty, you agree for the entity you call "government" to contract a hitman (which happen to be itself) against an individual you judge harmful to you. If you also extend this reasoning to the law enforcement/justice system, the government itself is an oppressive entity which punish by various violent methods (fines, imprisonment) misbehavior.
I don't agree with your point. What I want is the end of Government's monopoly in the use of force (ie. own, bear, and use arms in defense of lives and property) as well as end of violence-enforced compulsory theft (also known as taxes). To some extend, anybody should be allowed to negotiate the social contract, and opt-out from unwanted clause.
I always wonder why progressive folks end up resorting to insult and crude bullying when they run out of arguments...
This is not the correct approach. Even if I believe that the *original* purpose of a strongly Constitution-bounded limited Government's policies are driven with good intention, it always backfires into less honorable behaviors, and less boundaries, either intentionally or not. When these behaviors became unbearable by too many influential (yet minority) people, it turns into more laws, and inevitably into more dishonorable behaviors. This is the nature of the system.
Wait a bit, let people [ed. especially here] celebrate their "total internet freedom" [ed. nothing gonna really change, it's just a placebo] for a few years, and then implement full Title II regulation.
Please tell me about *any* company which has no interest in their fourth quarter earnings... Oh, I know, it's called "Government".
Do you mean that last-mile monopoly which has been given to them by... local governments ?
I don't know, I never bought a single app...
It's only been 20min, give people some slack...
Available on Amazon ... http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb...
The only reason I use "frack" instead of "fuck" is that generally, it goes through forum swearing's censorship unaltered. But yeah, I still do love BSG.
You, Dice's editors, all love SF, and spam /. with all the legends, but ENOUGH is fracking ENOUGH. Maturity is about knowing when to stop, and I think we've way beyond reason...
I'd just have accepted to do the cake, but charged enormous shipping and administrative fees :-)